DRUGS CASES UNDER R.A. NO. 9165. (By: Julius G.

Toledo)

1. CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE IN ILLEGAL DRUGS.

What is meant by chain of custody rule in dangerous drugs cases?

Under Section 21 of R.A. 9165 and Section(b) of the Dangerous Board Regulation No. 1,
Series of 2002, chain of custody means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody
of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory
equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic
laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court for destruction.

2. What are the requisites to establish the chain of custody in buy-bust operation?

To establish the chain of custody in buy-bust operation, the requisites are as follows: (a) The
seizure and marking of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending
officer; (b) The turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the
investigating officer; (c) The turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drugs to the
forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and (d) The turnover and submission of the
marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the court. (People vs Lapasaran, 687
SCRA 663).

3. How marking be made to establish the consistency in a chain of custody rule?

To establish consistency in chain of custody rule, the marking must be made in the following
manner: (a) The seized items should be marked in the presence of the apprehended violator;
(b) The marking should be done immediately after confiscation. (People vs. Somoza, 701
SCRA 525). There is nothing in Section 21, Article II of R.A. 9165 or its implementing rules
which require the presence of the elected public official during the buy-bust operation. (People
vs. Octavio, 695 SCRA 192).

4. What is the function of chain of custody requirement?

The function of chain of custody requirement is to ensure that the integrity and evidentiary
value of the seized items or the corpus delicti are preserved, so that unnecessary doubts as to
the identity of the evidence are removed. Proof of corpus delicti in a buy-bust operation
require not only the actual existence of the transacted drugs but also the certainty that the
drugs examined and presented in court were the very one seized. ( People vs. Langcua, 690
SCRA 123, People vs. Gozon, 707 SCRA 384).

5. May the non - compliance of Section 21 of R.A. 9165 or the chain of custody rule render the
arrest illegal or the items seized inadmissible?

NO. The non - compliance of Section 21 of R.A. 9165 or the chain of custody rule does not
necessarily render the arrest illegal or the items seized inadmissible because what is essential
is that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved which would be
utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused. (People vs. Quesido, 695
SCRA 572).

6. May the failure of the police officers to inventory and photograph the confiscated items fatal
to the prosecution’s cause?

NO. Failure of the police officers to inventory and photograph the confiscated items are not
fatal to the prosecution’s cause, provided that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized
substance were preserved. (People vs. Collado, 698 SCRA 628).

7. What is OBJECTIVE TEST in the conduct of buy-bust operation?

The objective test is a mode of determining the credibility of the presentation of witness
regarding the conduct of buy-bust operation. The prosecution must present a complete picture
detailing the buy-bust operation – from initial conduct between: (a) poseur - buyer and the
pusher, (b) the offer to purchase; (c) the promise or payment of consideration; (d) the delivery
of the illegal subject of sale which is the consummation of the sale of illegal drugs. (People vs.
Clara, 702 SCRA 273).

8. What are the requisites for the admissibility of illegal drugs?

The requisites for the admissibility of illegal drugs are as follows: (a) that the accused is in
possession of the object identified as prohibited drugs; (b) that such possession is not
authorized by law; (c) that the accused freely and consciously possessed the said illegal
drugs.

9. If evidence was obtained without complying with the chain of custody under Sec. 21 of R.A.
9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Law of 2002), What reasons could be adduced to
prevent its inadmissibility?

To prevents its inadmissibility, proof of corpus delicti in a buy-bust operation must be

established not only the actual existence of the transacted drugs but also the certainty that the
drugs examined and presented in court were the very one seized. (People vs. Gozon, 707
SCRA 384). The non - compliance the chain of custody rule does not render the arrest illegal
or the items seized inadmissible because what is essential is that the integrity and evidentiary
value of the seized items were preserved and were the very one presented in court. (People
vs. Quesido, 695 SCRA 572).